1. I would like to complete the maternal side of
the Dodder family....

2. Then I would like you to investigate the
Hessick side of the family.

3. Then I would like you to look at the Vosti
family.

4. Finally, we’d like to research Bob’s family.

That was quite an agenda. I was willing to explore what might be involved with priority #1. As I did I noticed there were conflicting opinions as to the name of Mary's and Joy's paternal grandmother. In one source she was listed as Ida Dodder Grove. For short time I entertained the idea that she had remarried a Grove after her marriage to Charles Dodder had ended. That speculation was short lived. FamilySearch's cooperative and comprehensive Family Tree listed her as Ida Smith and assigned her a long multi-generational list of ancestors. But that Ida Smith was going to turn out to be born about a decade too early. Ida's true maiden name was literally chiseled in stone.

To investigate more deeply what the atDNA of Mary and Joy could tell us, I downloaded their raw results from AncestryDNA and uploaded them to GEDmatch. GEDmatch keeps operating on donations and does not charge membership subscriptions for most of its services including the ones I will be discussing here. Additional analysis tools are offered to those who donate to keep this volunteer site operating. I used the People who match both kits tool to narrow my focus to individuals to whom Mary and Joy both were related through their shared father. When I did so some familiar names began to emerge.The 3rd, 5th, 9th and 18th highest matches on their combined list were known close cousins of mine. Bob is my maternal 2nd cousin. Doris, James and Mary S. are known maternal 1st cousins. Even I was a match but was way down the list. Isn't atDNA fickle? ;-)

name

Mary M

Joy

Bob

63.7

37.7

Doris

51.7

62.6

James

44.4

52.2

Mary S

31.7

38.7

Dave

12.0

33.5

Conclusion: The two half-sisters are related to my family on my maternal side. In addition, this relationship was through my maternal grandmother because of the strong match of my 2nd cousin Bob. Now we are making progress. But how far back was our connection?

To explore that question I ran a Generations analysis. The value shown is estimated
generations to Most Recent Common Ancestor.(MRCA):

name

Mary M

Joy

Mary M

1.4

Joy

1.4

Doris

4.1

3.9

Dave

5.1

4.4

Mary S

4.4

4.3

James

4.2

4.1

Bob

3.9

4.3

Unsurprisingly the two half sisters showed up as about a generation and a half apart since they only share one parent. The rest of us showed up about 4 generations removed from the Most Recent Common Ancestor we shared with the half-sisters. Now we are getting someplace. We are looking for someone who is an ancestor of my maternal grandmother who is about 4 generations back. B

ut we still have quite a way to go.

My grandmother had a Cashatt father and a Grove mother. Where have we seen one of those names before? Can atDNA help us more?

I do have a 3rd cousin who also has transferred her atDNA results to GEDmatch. She does not share my Cashatt ancestors but she does share the Grove line. Do her results help? Actually they do. She shares 32.2 cM with Joy and 15.3 with Mary. Apparently these just missed the threshold to be included in the test I ran above. She is predicted to be 4.4 generations removed from her common ancestor with Joy and 4.9 generations from Mary. This cousin shares Grove ancestors. I think we have a winner here.

We still don't know how far back this connection is. To determine that I had to build back the pedigree tree of Ida. Remember her? After considerable research that included several marriage records, several census records, several vital records, etc. I was able to connect her back to my 3rd great-grandparents. I had been able to confirm my connection to them 11 years ago using both property records and tombstones as the remnants of Hurricane Katrina was bearing down on Ohio; but that is another story for another day.

Saturday, September 24, 2016

It was the third full day of Olympic competition in Rio. In
the pool Ryan Murphy had just collected a gold medal for the US in the 100 meter
backstroke. Michael Phelps swam semis of 200 meter butterfly. Keri Walsh
Jennings & April Ross had convincingly defeated the Chinese team of Wang
& Yue 21-16, 21-9 on the beach. Although there was more competition on TV,
I had had enough for the night and headed to bed. However, I walked past my
computer and felt compelled to check my email.

There was an incoming message from a former colleague in
California. I had renewed my acquaintance with Mary during a chance encounter
in June at a restaurant in Morro Bay, CA, where we were having lunch with
several friends and former neighbors. She walked in to the restaurant with a
former genealogy client of mine and we got to chatting about using DNA in
family history research. I had previously made a cameo appearance in her
journalism class to discuss two aspects of intellectual property that I covered
in my course “Ethics in the Information Age” – copyright and plagiarism.

Mary’s email said in part:

I bought your books and am reading and learning as fast as I
can, but I don’t think I can find my sister in less than a year. You are so
incredibly fast at this relative hunting do you think you can find her for me?
I would be happy to pay for your time but it would never be enough. She
is probably 80 by now so time is critical.

Thanks for considering my proposal. I’ve visited more than
90 countries and now I’d just like to talk about the dad she never knew with
this half sister. Her family never approved of my dad, the creative inventor,
so pushed him away after only a year. Her name is Joy by the way.

I
made sure I had the codes to access Mary’s recent DNA test results and went on
to bed.

The
search turned out to be easier than any of us expected. By the time Mary got up
and checked her email the next morning, there was a message asking her to call
me AND there were two pictures of Joy waiting in her email box.

Before
noon Nashville time Mary had used one of the phone numbers I had given her to
reach Joy and they had talked on the phone for more than an hour and a half.
This was to be the first of many, almost daily calls that have followed.

It
is rarely this easy. Two years earlier when I had unexpectedly gotten an
unknown 1st cousin DNA match, it had taken over seven months to
figure out which sibling of one of my parents was responsible for my newly
discovered cousin Jim being on this earth. That tale has previously been chronicled in this blog. As difficult as Jim’s search had been, even Jim’s
search was easier than many.

Joy
was literally just sitting there waiting to be found. She had positioned
herself well. Both she and Mary had tested at AncestryDNA. Joy appeared on Mary's match list:

1,857 cM of shared DNA is far too much for a normal 1st cousin match. This almost certainly had to be the half-sister Mary was seeking. All that remained was to locate her.

I immediately left a message for this match in Ancestry’s proprietary process of contacting other members. However, because years of experience have taught me that this indirect method of contact is slow at best and often ineffective. It values the privacy of the matches over efficiency of making contact. It also does not always notify the match that a message is waiting online – particularly if the match has not maintained an ongoing Ancestry subscription.

Fortunately, in this case Joy had not made a serious effort to hide her identity. I was later to find out that she also had been searching for her half-sister off and on for a decade but there are lots of women named Mary out there.

Joy’s Ancestry login was a combination of her initials and married name --not so good for privacy but great for leaving bread crumbs for matches to follow. Joy had posted a brief pedigree chart on Ancestry which listed her as “Private” but outed her husband and included a picture of him. After searching several online directories of living people I found a recent address in Texas and three phone numbers listed in The U.S. Public Records Index. I was able to find accounts for Joy on LinkedIn and Facebook. While exploring LinkedIn, I got a popup suggestion of a person who might be able to introduce us. That person was a person very active in helping adoptees find their birth families. This led me to believe that Joy might be actively seeking her biological relatives – an assumption that turned out to be only partly correct. The pictures on Facebook matched the handsome fellow attached to Joy’s pedigree
chart on Ancestry.This search was
a little more complicated than that but not much. I’ll probably
never have an easier case than this. Mary sent me a check with a generous tip
added; but I’ll always treasure what was written in the memo section of the
check more than the money. It said, “For Great Joy".

A
big uniting event is planned for early November in Texas. Pictures to follow.Dr. D. made another interesting find as he located the missing half-sister. It connects him to the sisters; but that is another story for another day -- sometime very soon.